Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G15 review

Just Posted: Our Canon PowerShot G15 review. The G15 is one of the latest wave of updated enthusiast compact cameras and it follows this season's trend of gaining a brighter lens and CMOS sensor in the process. It still offers a 28-140mm equivalent lens range but its maximum aperture range has been pushed to F1.8-2.8 - a whole stop faster, throughout its range, than the older G12. It's lost that camera's flip-out screen but has lost bulk in the process and has retained that rarest of things - an optical viewfinder. Will this makeover of the G-series formula be enough to win back its place at the top of the heap? Read our review to find out.

After owning a G10 for over 4 years decided to upgrade. Was SO looking forward to my new G1X! Shots at low iso levels were amazing...however auto focus lag was unbearable and macro was useless. Photos were hit and miss. Returned tried the Rx100...not as great as it's made out to be. Finally picked up the G15...the photos are incredible...even usable at high iso. We can all talk about sensor size etc but in the end it's all about the quality of the shot and the G15 outperforms the others...hands down the winner in my books!! Thanks for all your reviews!

@Charrick...With all due respect are yo not being fanatical about not having optical viewfinders. I can understand if you've never used a good eye level viewfinder. I admit the one on G15 is not good nor accurate but even a bad viewfinder at times can be a life saver when shooting at the longer end of the zoom range. Just imagine shooting even at moderate telephoto settings how the camera shake is translated on to the screen whilst trying to compose. Having the camera rested against your face helps you greatly to hold the camera steady. I can personally live with a mediocre screen but not without a viewfinder. Ps. You don't have to be a "real photographer" to use view finders.

All depends on how you shoot. I normally rest the camera against my knees, hips, or a wall with articulated screen. I would LOVE a nice optical viewfinder for those few occasions where I shoot eye level but for most of my shots I can't see through the viewfinder when the back of the camera is against the wall and I don't feel like laying on the ground for every knee level shot.

I think that people who think of themselves as "real photographers" are fanatic about optical viewfinders.

Look at the paragraph and picture above. Here's one quote:

"It's lost that camera's flip-out screen but has lost bulk in the process and has retained that rarest of things - an optical viewfinder."

OK guys...be honest. What good is that? Can some "real photographers" tell me? It's a tiny viewfinder with a parallax error and has no shooting information on it (all problems the LCD lacks). Now look at the photo. A guy is inside a relatively dark room (not outside at noon on a clear day at the beach with lots of glare) and he's still using the tiny optical viewfinder with a parallax error instead of the back screen.

Seems a bit silly, don't you think? Alas, I can never be a "real photographer", because I often use LCD screens on cameras, and I think that flip-out screens are more important to have than optical viewfinders. I know. I'm such a noob.

On my G's, I have rarely ever used the optical viewfinder. It's imprecise and so tiny, I have to perfectly align it with my eye to even use. Compared to the articulating display of previous models, the optical viewfinders of the G's are completely outperformed by the display.

Double the optical viewfinder surface area and fix the parallax and then they can start talking about how removing the articulating display was a good idea. the G's are really good for only 2 things; form factor and articulating display.

I fully appreciate that many people have no need for an eye-level viewfinder; but I use the one on my A1200 nearly all the time, even though it's pretty crappy. I don't want to have to put my glasses on every time I take a picture, and my eyes can't get close to focusing on the LCD without them.

It's a fair criticism: how bad does an OVF have to be before one starts to prefer framing on the rear LCD? Because the OVF on the G series is far from that of even an entry level dSLR.

The answer has a lot to do with how comfortable you are taking photos "cell-phone style", holding it out in 2 feet in front of you.

A lot of (older) people hate that. They like to hold the camera up to their face, braced up against their nose. It's more "traditional" (waist-level ground glass screens notwithstanding)... it is also legitimately a better grip for preventing camera shake.

To answer the unspoken question: why not make it an EVF? Well, probably cost at this point, but the better answer is "because the Canon G series have always had this optical viewfinder". It's a hallmark feature, part of the camera's reputation of having everything you might need, just in case.

A statement that holds true to this review is ' all things considered ''.

There are many comments questioning why the RX100 was not rated higher. It has a fast lens and large sensor. Very important factors. But are they the only factors? No. Price, lcd, processor speed, video etc.

So with DPR's considerable camera knowledge and 'all things considered' from their viewpoint they did this review.

Take it or leave it, but I am sure this review was given much thought and debate before it was posted.

So much partisan silliness on these forums. As I've actually proved a couple of times on the forums here, in blind taste, EXIF stripped, photo comparisons most of the worst fanboys cannot actually tell margarine from butter or one camera's output from another in real world shots. Buy a Porsche if you want to define yourself by an object.

So DP review continues its inconsistent award system... Let's see, in the past week two Gold awards in the same category--almost pocketable zooms (Canon, Panasonic).

And when the camera that virtually professional reviewer says "the best pocket camera" they give a silver. Fine. Imaging resource reviews are better anyway. They emphasize print output and are consistent.

BTW: this negative comment is directed at the "poor officiating" here not at the camera. Enjoy your pursesable camera. Being a guy I'll stick to the best pocketable camera.

So why are you here on this site? Amazes me that people use the free service of a site all the while attempting to degrade it. Really I'm curious to know.

Just because an opinion (which is what DPR's awards are...) doesn't match an individuals (yours in this case) it's inconsistent? Can you imagine if DPR rated cameras on readers opinions and not their own? Talk about inconsistent!

You shouldn't expect someone's subjective opinion to be a universal truth. The scoring system is meant to be as objective as possible, while the award is just the individual reviewer's personal opinion, and therefore reflect that person's preferences and bias. This should be no cause for alarm, because the DPR staff are just humans, and humans are by nature biased, because we all have needs, desires, preferences and emotions.A technically superior camera isn't necessarily more enjoyable to use, perhaps because you don't like its ergonomics or whatever, and therefore it may very well fall short of a gold award.

In the 'Features' section there is a great figure comparing equivalent apertures, and I think the data shown for the Panasonic LX7 are based on the whole sensor dimensions (1/1.7" sensor). However, the implementation of that camera's multi-aspect ratio sensor is such that it is effectively 6.7 x 5.1mm (1/1.8") in 4:3 aspect ratio and less than that in other aspect ratios.

Taking that into consideration, the LX7 lens becomes 24-89mm f/7-11.6 equivalent with crop factor calculated based on sensor area or 24-91mm f/7.2-11.8 equivalent with crop factor based on sensor diagonal.

You may be right - I'll check when I'm back in the office. I've calculated the LX7's active area before but I can't totally rule-out forgetting to use that figure in these calculations. Thanks for pointing it out - I'll change it as soon as I can.

We aren't being unfair to it - we're showing the proportions of the largest area of the sensor you can use (which is the 4:3 image size in this instance). That's the same measurement we're using for all the other cameras here, too.

For my money, this is the perfect pocket camera at this price-point. As the technology develops and sensor prices drop, they really just need to make the sensor larger, oh and maybe add in-camera panorama-stitching. That's it. It fills up my pocket perfectly and handles like a dream.

Good for you, Howard! Attaboy! Unfortunately, a miss is as good as a mile in this case. A 500 dollar price point (in round numbers) is still not a 600 dollar price point (in round numbers). Why do so many people on this comments board lack critical-thinking skills? A missed price-point is a missed price-point. And you still can't put the G1X in your shirt pocket. ;-) FYI: at the time I posted, the price difference at B&H and Yodobashi was indeed 60%. Adorama is irrelevant to me as they will not ship it to Japan. Cheers.

I just checked Adorama: the G1X costs 799 dollars. It is available *used* for 549 dollars. Hey Howard, did you buy yours used? LOL The G15 costs 499 dollars. That is a 60.12% difference. Case closed, point proved, I win. ;-)

So I'll ask my question again since apparently nobody wants to answer?..The Nikon P7700 was out well before the G15 and is logically in direct competition with the Canon G15.. so when can we expect a review of this APN? .. And would it not make more sense for a site like Dpreview and for customers to respect the timing of outputs in this category?..Thanks by advance for the answer..it will probably help to remove some doubts (at least mine..) about the relative idépendance of photo web site like yours..

We have limited resources, which means we can only review a small number of cameras at any given time. We prioritise cameras based on various factors, with most of it to do with how much interest there appears to be from our readers (and how interesting they seem when we try using them).

We have shot a samples gallery with the P7700 and will be including it in a round-up that will be published soon (along with several other cameras that we would have loved to have had time to review), but we can't review every single camera.

Surely you can review every camera everyone here is interested in, make sure it gets the mark everyone wants to see, include Pulitzer prize winning samples, offer discount codes for the Amazon checkout, arrange to have your team come around to our houses for parameter setting support, take us out shooting with beautiful models and then arrange dates for us.

Maybe FarTing has a point. I also found that picture taken by Nokia phone is somehow better than some compacts(not from G15 league of course). The Nokia phone produces images with a lot of noise, but that's what NR software is for. Compact, on the other hand, overdo NR. Detail lost is worse than with no NR at all.

It's sometimes "painfully entertaining" to read comments such as "FartIng" writes. He/she has no idea what sort of camera s/he needs but buys the most expensive fixed-zoom compact on the market only to find out it's not the one he/she needs. It's one more salesperson's success story.

Yep ... and along the dynamic range also the chromatic aberration. As non-picture quality related issues there are the consistency of the metering system and the overall system speed.

Anyway, coming back to the subject: No G15 for me. A fixed monitor is a deal killer to me. Second point: My G11 is far not as solid as I thought it is, judging from it's weight and feel. On mine as an example the optical viewfinder has massive dust intrusion. Everywhere the hands-on quality was praised, but the real world long term quality seems is a different subject.

In Singapore's weather, the G11 does not faire too well. My G11 optical viewfinder has so much dust and sand in it, it's nearly impossible to see through in the few times I do use the OVF (thankfully, not a lot).

Also, the humidity and heat looks to have hardended the dust inside the OVF!

I understand and appreciate that use of the excellent dpreview is free. Thanks for the excellence of the website.

I would appreciate however if the reviews of that class of camera would include information about the dynamic range (allowing me to compare the dynamic range of cameras of that class).

For me, the dynamic range (even for that type of cameras) is one of the most important criterias (other important charachteristics for me are of course the dimensions, the zoom-range, optical viewfinder, the visibility of the subject on the screen in bright/sunny environments,...)

Techradar.com show dynamic range comparisons over all the ISO's on their reviews if you want to see this. In fact I have just noticed on the G15 review the XZ-2 is showing 12ev at 100 ISO in JPEG which is amazing and if correct would blow the opposition away. I agree with you that this is an important number but few reviewers quantify it.

Dude, I think DPR was bang on mentioning the RX100 camera as they did. Sensor size matters and for most point & shoot users, it becomes a question of price versus performance. DPR made that abundantly clear in this review. Not hilarious.

To say that the RX100 is in the same class as the S100, is like saying the Mercedes E Class is in the same class as the Toyota Camry . Maybe somewhat similar size. But a big price difference(and diferent sized sensor/engine).

"Putting RX100 in the same class as larger -- not pocketable -- big sensor p&s (such as G1X) or cameras with a fix lens primes like Fuji X100 was really really dumb." And yet RX100 owners are, time after time, the first people to do it.

Are your feelings hurt or something? Classes are stupid anyways, people spend money on a camera, that's the only class that matters. Do I want to spend $100 or $1000? Is the RX100 the EXACT same size as the S110? Of course not, it is only within your limits of acceptability. Well, maybe the RX100 vs G1X is within theirs.And what's with the multiple edits? Did you realize how you sounded each time and had to change it up? Shady...

Obviously going to come off as an OLY fanboy, but I do not understand how your review did not mention the XZ-1 OR the newer XZ-2 as comparable competition, and have to actually resort to mentioning the Nikon 1 series or m43.

I have held the XZ-2, and its is equally built like a tank; has the fast AF akin to that of the PEN series if not the RX100, and has a nice f1.8 - 2.5 lens, albeit shorter (112 vs 140 at long end). I would expect that your reviews do mention competition in its entirety.

There are too many competitors to discuss every single one in every review, so Lars focused on the nearest competitors. We'll be doing a roundup of this class of cameras in the coming weeks, including the XZ-2 and a handful of others.

Oh yeah, the XZ-2 is more expensive; oh wait...theRX100 is even more expensive than the more expensive XZ2; wrong price point not being the correct term.

To DPR; I cannot fault the fact that there are too many points to discuss, but I really don't agree with your statement that its difficult to mention them at the end; You guys have the most uptodate info of all new AND old cameras, its only fair to have them ALL mentioned - which most are, in the span of one or two sentences as notable 'competitors'.

If you were to mention nearest competitors, you should mention those in the appropriate range - i.e. the fixed zoom lens group. This was done, but it sort of shows that those mentioned were the only similar cameras; then your review added the Nikon 1 Series and the PENs and suggested they were very close.

This is seriously misleading. As much as the new sensors deliver competitive images to other cam types, your 'professional' reviews should make it clear who the competition is.

"The camera feels like a mini-EOS 1D, extremely solid with soft and comfortable rubberized hand grip and thumb rest. The magnesium alloy surfaces have been very slightly roughened, giving them a quality feel. It'll be hard to find another compact camera that feels this well put together".

This passage from this review seems a bit over-enthusiastic. I get what the reviewer is trying to say, but an EOS 1D is a completely weather sealed tank of a camera. That level of build isn't found in any compact, and just because this camera is made by Canon doesn't make similar as far as build. A P7700 is all magnesium alloy and few would say it's like a mini-D4.

Lastly, i haven't handled a G15 (I have handled other G series cameras), but the reviewer thinks "it'll be hard to find another compact as well put together". The all metal Fuji X10 and GRD IV are about as good as it gets for build quality and I assume DPR remembers them. Maybe he meant "put together better"?

I'm not doubting that it's solid but questioning whether it's possible ("hard to find" as you wrote) a compact as robust. There is very little plastic on an X10, LX7, GRD IV, and from what I've read, a P7700.

I thought that section came on a bit strong, but I will let you know when I play with a G15 down at B&H.

We are photogs...these are cameras. Take yourself down to the shop and check it out for yourself. I've handled the g15, and it's indeed a great feeling, solid little unit with great upgraded spec- but my g12s articulating screen is way too valuable to lose, so ill check back next year.

I'm reading this thread just to pass the time but I see a ton of heavy handed, disrespectful comments to the site. You dudes should really check yourself, or just move on. Take your lazy butts and create your own site. You may not agree with so called missing camera reviews and the like, but at least don't be an a- hole about it.

Perhaps in their next release Canon can adopt the following features into one highly competent camera. That is the G15's fast lens, AF speed, macro capabilities and 5X optical(modify to 24mm) combined with the G1X's large sensor, optics and articulating display. Price it between the G1X and G15, include a decent OVF and improve the movie recording capabilities and then I'm sure the other manufacturers and brand loyalists will have no choice but to take notice.

If you want G1X's large sensor, than buy a G1X. The G15 and future G16 are different animals and will not have a sensor that big. If they have another camera like you mentioned it will not be a G16 but a G2X.

I would however like to add also the following requests: - it should be as pocketable as the G15 - the content of the display/monitor should be well visible in a bright/sunny environment (important for those like me, who shoot primarily outdoor) - it should have a good dynamic range (I have unfortunately not the slighest idea, how good the dyanamic Range of the G15 is).- and perhaps a good in-camera HDR support

Hey Lars, just to verify: the G15 still does NOT have *fulll* manual video recording, right? You can set exposure compensation, but as far as I understand you don't have direct input of shutter speed, aperture, and ISO for video, am I correct in this?

Mescalamba (or other users): since I have only an extremely limited experience with Elkectronic Viewfinders, may I please ask about how good EVFs are today? My only experience with EVF was with a Leica EVF for my Lumix DX5 and I was very disappointed. Absolutely no pleasure when looking at what the EVF was showing. I therefore returned the EVF.

@Mescalamba... I'm so threatened I don't know what to think now. Please share your wisdom more with us. We may feel threatened but we'll become better and wiser people nevertheless. By the way, what cheap propaganda ridden psychology magazine do you read?

Well they are certainly better than what you used. That add-on EVF you had on your LX5 was actually worse than one in original Panasonic G1, since then EVFs became quite a bit more mature. For example one in OM-D EM-5 is actually very good, more detailed, much faster and even DR is pretty ok. Same goes to one in for example Sony A99.

Im not exactly fan of EVF, but they are only solution for mirrorless and all alike. In case of Sony NEX EVFs, you have 100% viewfinder (which is truly 100% no matter what as it sees exactly what sensor does), you can magnify up to per-pixel level or you can switch focus peaking for much faster manual focusing (if you wish for it).

Latest generation of EVFs for m4/3s and NEX/Alpha are actually quite pleasant to use, they could be always better, but its pretty usable tech right now.

So I really dont know why Canon havent used one, it could improve usability of G15 quite a lot (and same goes to EOS-M).

Thats right, but not-so-small-but-still-small Nikon 1 or better m4/3 have same advantage while having much better sensor and much better offering of lens. But ofc not new cams, only SH can reach 500 USD price. Still its possible..

I have always been a huge fan of the G series, and this one looks quite drool-worthy, and more than capable of bearing all of the expectations that come with that esteemed G letter name. I helped convince a friend to get a G9 not too long after it came out a few years back, and he still shoots with it and loves it. These cameras are as tough as they seem.. their build quality is no joke. And that Canon is one of the very few still using an optical viewfinder, is something I commend them for. I am not a Canon fanboy by any means (if I had the money, my bags would be chock full of Zuiko Super High Grade glass, so that lets you know which side of the fanboi fence I sit on, in case my moniker did not tip you off!) BUT, I can definitely give credit where it is due, bravo Canon, and bravo DPReview for another great review. Don't ever change that studio scene comparometer, it is so warm and familiar (and full of utility) .. we NEED it!

By scoring RX100 and G15 in different classes do you mean to say that your scoring of both cameras will be of little use for those who are considering one out of the two? Or the potential buyers have to decipher the fact that RX100 is a better camera by drawing parallel lines from equivalent points on the spectra of different classes of cameras ( the only geometric solution to your scoring system ).

Limited zoom range fixed lens. "Viewfinder" is basically totally useless (I tried the camera, that's how I know). Nikon P7700 gives plenty more features and better specs for about the same dough. Of course, this one has the word "CANON" emblazed on it, so for some, that may be worth a few hundred bucks right then and there, huh?

Not rugged enough? I have owned my S100 for a year and have beatin' it. Hiking, up Mount Fuego in Guatemala to see the active volcano, on fishing trips, on the windy beaches of Cancun and what have you. I am pretty sure this is more durable than my S100.

I'm no Canon shill, but my relatively crappy SX230 travel zoom survived a fall on pavement that left me a little bloody. It was in my pocket and took the brunt of the fall. The lens protector was totally crushed, but worked after I spent a while bending the leaves back into rough shape with pliers and other tools. It still doesn't always open automatically, but I can coax it open. The LCD has a couple of purple spots with no resolution. The bottom line is that image quality is perfect and I still use the camera all the time. Kind of surprised me, to be honest. My hat's off to Canon. I fell on that sucker HARD.

That's what hapens when a 10 yrs. old sensor tech repeatedly stamping on the competition. Look at P7700 as a example, that is suppose to their latest greatest(sensor).........flap once again. Slow lense, slow AF, mushy IQ, slow response and bulky too aka obese. Nikon just can't stop selling LEMON.

Have you tried it? look what critics are saying comparing both: P7700 has better detail until ISO800, better DR, snappier AF even in low light, more true to life screen colors,... Maybe it's a little more sluggish in operation than G15 ( and especially Lumix LX7), but nothing in the way of Mammoth speed like P7000. I am no fanboy, and I have tried both G15 and P7700 extensively before buying. Nikon one this time is just better in every way (apart color, and NR in high ISO).

What pockets does it fit? Purseable, yes...my pockets on a 6 Foot frame don't accept cameras this size in any shirt pocket and only a few of my pants. The pant's pocket would lead to: is that a big camera in your pocket or you just excited to see me?

It fits all of my shirt pockets except the polo shirts: business, casual, everything. Except the polos. Slips in nicely, can carry it there all day. Of course, I am 6 foot one inch tall and weigh 70kg (154lbs). Not exactly a huge guy. Your mileage may vary.

I shoot about 95% with articulated screen so I am really disappointed that Canon would "upgrade" by REMOVING the articulated screen. It is something they helped pioneer and they did it well and some of us actually NEED it for what we do. So why would they reduce their own potential market by removing this? Makes no sense to me. They have already developed it. There is very little extra cost to add it. And how much camera thickness does it really save to remove it? Likey not much.

Typical Canon modus operandi. Just look ast the new Canon EOS C300 camera that goes for a hair under $30,000. Canon claims it is a 4K capable video camera -- it is just that it cannot record in 4K resolution, and Canon does not even make a 4K recorder for it. In their own promotion they mate the EOS C300 to a $30,000 Codex external video recorder made by a company totally not affiliated with Canon.

No...? They're both top-notch, category-leading cameras. Both have strengths and weaknesses, there's no denying either of them. Get whichever one looks more interesting to you and I assure you, you'll take great pictures with either. That is, if YOU'RE good enough to utilize their capabilities and compensate their shortcomings.

Thank you for the review. As usual I found it to be informative, precise and well written. Almost absolutely agree whith your views respect to the camera.

As a G15 recent user (before it, I had a G12) I love its results & usability (yes, ergonomy is a big factor here as, for example, I never will consider purchasing a camera without some kind of ovf/evf in it).

I am sure thet there are another good compacts out there but the G15 is clearly a very serious contender. As for me, DPR's review makes justice to that.

I am only quessing but I suspect that the average age of DPs commentators is fairly young.Many photographers,amateur at least,are over 50 and need reading glasses to view rear screens. The poor visibility of these screens(yes I have tried the Sony) in good light added to the fact that one needs to put on glasses means that viewfinders are much the better option, apart from anything else the camera can be held much more steadily . One can also get a much better "feel " for the composition.I have never understood how people can take great photos with a camera at arm's length. The Sony is a great camera but with no viewfinder ,not even an option of one ,so sensibly offered by panasonic/olympus on their expert compacts,is a serious omission,and will put off many "senior" photographers. The Canon vewfinder is far from ideal but is certainly better than nothing. A built in EVF would be great and hopefully considered for a future model.

I use an inexpensive, 2x magnification Vivitar brand LCD VF loupe (model DSLR-LM3) that blocks out for me 100% of the outside light and gives me a huge, super-clean image to see and focus on. Not only that the VF gained this way using the camera'as LCD screen is colossal in apparent image size, my nose does not have to press hard against the camera's rear side in trying to squint through some tiny VF's peep-hole. I recommend it highly.

Personally, I've always relied on the face-mash as a third point of contact for stability when I'm not on a tripod/camera stand. And I've got a schnozz, not one of those cute button things some folks have. (I hate shooting MF hand-held for that reason, though the results make me feel a whole lot better about it.) Chacun a son goût, I suppose.

Excellent Image Quality. Very sharp and bright Lens. Well done Canon. It's time for me to ditch my S100 and Pick up a G15. After all the comparisons I have, I truly believe the G15 did outperform in a lot of area's to my eyes!!!

I have no issue with the fixed screen- bar self portraits, the screen has exceptional viewing angles and there's less fiddling involved. Now don't get me wrong, both types of screen I can appreciate- and have, but it just makes for a different shooting experience with either is all. I kind of like how the G15 is slimmer and more compact and it is noticeable for sure over the G12 and especially the G1X.

Given the RX100 and the G1X, why does this camera exist? The RX100 has pocketable with great IQ nailed perfectly. The G1X is larger with an articulating screen. The G15 is large with a small sensor and no articulating screen. Also, giving the G15 a gold and the RX100 a silver looks very much like favoritism.

You should not base all judgement on spec sheets. I'd prefer the G15 over a G1 X any time. It's so much faster in every way, and smaller and while the IQ is not quite the same it is still very good. These enthusiast compacts have improved a lot over the last few years.

who cares about what DPR or any other reviewer says. Look if the features it has fit you, find pictures online and see what IQ it has and decide to buy or not buy. It needs to fit you and match your needs. What DXO, DPR and others say is just indicative. And, do not take DPR shots as a status to mek up your mind, 85% of all shots you see in their review are far from what a camera is able to do. Sometime it seems to me that those who shoot need a serious lesson in picture taking. In a camera review, there should at least be 5 shots in different scenery that need to match in every test, so you can compare how a camera performs on the same subject, giving and idea of sharpness and color cast. The marine museum that comes back quiet often is such a subject, but, you have to fix one place or one frame that you keep as a reference.

How can you compare cameras if you do not find the same shot in every test and the studio set-up is not reliable since DPR omits to select the same exact focusing point in the tests. Every time i have to analyze and find where the camera focused before I can imagine how good it performs. It is obvious that cameras who select a different AF point by their own, make a picture studio setup obsolete if you let the camera seek for what it things to be best to set it's focusing point.

Ha, ha, the original and best method. But wait, isn't using a tripod cheating? It means you don't have to spend a lot of money to get inferior in-camera or in-lens image stabilization. I don't know, sounds a little fishy to me.

More about gear in this article

The holiday season is upon us once again and with all the sales and special deals around at the moment, this is a great time to start thinking about getting a new camera. Maybe for a loved one, maybe just as a treat to yourself. In this article, we'll be looking at the current field of enthusiast zoom compact cameras, and examining their relative strengths and weaknesses to help you make your buying decision. Click through for a link to our 12-page article.

'What camera should I buy?' That's a question we get asked a lot here at dpreview, and it's a tough one to answer. We use a lot of cameras, from simple point-and-shoot models to professional workhorses, and everything in between. To help you make a buying decision this holiday season, we've put together a short article which covers five of what we think are the best zoom compact cameras on the market right now, and summarized their strengths and weaknesses. Click through to see what we think.

Canon has been busy this year, and the demonstration areas are thronged with enthusiasts keen to get their hands on Canon's latest products including the mirrorless EOS M and the 6D - Canon's most affordable full-frame DSLR yet.

Just Posted: Our Canon PowerShot G15 hands-on preview. It would have been easy to assume the small-sensor PowerShot G series was at an end when Canon introduced the 1.5" sensor G1 X, but the G15 continues the 1/1.7" sensor tradition and looks back to the series' beginnings with the addition of a bright lens. The 28-140mm equivalent, F1.8-2.8 lens offers a pretty impressive specification in anyone's book (it's over a stop brighter than the G12, all the way through the range). So is the camera to stand up to the enthusiast camera onslaught? Read our preview to find out our early thoughts.

Photokina 2012: Canon has refreshed its G-series enthusiast compact with the G15, and created the implausible SX50 HS. The G15 is a successor to the G12 and is built around a 12MP, 1/1.7" CMOS sensor. Its lens also gets an upgrade - retaining its 28-140mm range but now with a maximum aperture of F1.8-2.8. It loses the G12's articulated screen but gains a higher-resolution, 920k dot panel. Meanwhile the SX50 HS features a remarkable 24-1200mm equivalent 50x zoom, thanks to its smaller 1/2.3" CMOS sensor.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Nikon Z6 may not offer the incredible resolution of its sibling, the Z7, but its 24MP resolution is more than enough for most people, and the money saved can buy a lot of glass. Find out what's new and notable about the Z6 in our First Impressions Review.

Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.

The SiOnyx Aurora is a compact camera designed to shoot stills and video in color under low light conditions, so we put it to the test under the northern lights and against a Nikon D5. It may not be a replacement for a DSLR, but it can complement one well for some uses.

At its core, the Scanza is an easy-to-use multi-format film scanner. It offers a quick and easy way to scan your film negatives and slides into JPEGs, but costs a lot more than similar products without a Kodak label.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

For the past few weeks, our readers have been voting on their favorite photographic gear released in the past year in a wide range of categories. Now that the first round of voting is over, it's time to pick the best overall product of 2018.

Sony had the full-frame mirrorless market to itself for nearly five years, but it's no longer alone – the Nikon Z6 and Canon EOS R have both arrived priced to compete with the a7 III. We take a head to head to head look at these three cameras.

As if it needed one, the triple-camera smartphone might really be the final nail in the compact camera's coffin. DPR contributor Lars Rehm brought the LG V40 on a hiking trip recently and found it to be a huge leap forward in terms of creative freedom.

Renowned UK-based landscape photographer Nigel Danson has been using DSLRs for years. In this video, created exclusively for DPReview, Nigel discusses his experience using the Nikon Z7 and why he's excited about mirrorless cameras. (Spoiler... beautiful scenery ahead.)

Chinese optical manufacturer Kipon has added the Nikon Z and Canon R mounts to its range of adapters made to attach medium format lenses from Hasselblad, Mamiya, Pentax and others to full frame cameras.